NewNow you can listen to Fox News articles!
President Donald Trump said the ceasefire with Iran is “largely on life support”, as retired US commanders and national security experts grow divided over whether Washington should resume military operations against Tehran or avoid what critics warn could lead to another protracted Middle East conflict.
“I would say the ceasefire is largely on life support,” Trump told reporters on Monday. “Where the doctor comes in and says, ‘Sir, your loved one’s chance of survival is about 1%.'”
Trump dismissed Iran’s latest response to the proposed deal as a “piece of garbage” amid reports that the White House is reviewing military options if talks fail.
Retired Lieutenant General HR McMaster, a former national security adviser under Trump, said he believed Iran’s leadership was unlikely to make the concessions required by Trump for the deal.
White House warns Iran if it withdraws from deal: Trump ready to ‘unleash hell’
President Donald Trump said the ceasefire with Iran is “largely on life support”, as a growing divide among retired US commanders and national security experts over whether Washington should resume military operations. (Atta Kenare/AFP via Getty Images)
“I think the Iranian leadership and the IRGC are unwilling to make the kind of concessions that President Trump considers the minimum level,” McMaster told Fox News Digital, referring to Iran’s radical Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.
“President Trump always wants a deal,” he said. “But he’s not going to sign up for a bad deal.”
The emerging debate now focuses on the main question facing Washington: whether additional military pressure could force Iran to abandon its nuclear and missile ambitions, or whether renewed attacks would deepen the regional conflict without a decisive outcome.
Retired Vice Admiral Mark Fox, former deputy commander of US Central Command (CENTCOM), said he believes the existing ceasefire and diplomatic tracks are unlikely to force Iran to back down.
“I really can’t envision anything other than a full return to combat operations,” Fox told Fox News Digital. “I think the only thing they will respond to is ultimately force.”
Fox argued that U.S. forces are able to reopen and secure commercial shipping through the Strait of Hormuz despite ongoing Iranian threats against ships passing through the waterway.
Despite Trump’s ceasefire, Iran stops oil traffic, Hormuz choke point remains intact
Supporters of renewed military action argue that Iran is weaker than it has been in decades and that stopping it now risks allowing Tehran to regroup, rebuild its missile arsenal and maintain dominance over one of the world’s most important energy choke points. (AP photo)
“This is a militarily achievable objective,” he said, outlining a strategy involving guided missile destroyers, attack helicopters, drones and expanded aerial surveillance to create a protected sea corridor through the strait.
Fox acknowledged that the US Navy is smaller than during the tanker wars of the 1980s, but argued that US forces still have the ability to secure chokepoints if Washington commits sufficient naval assets and a persistent surveillance operation.
“It’s not easy,” Fox said. “But geography is fixed.”
He described a possible strategy that would rely on destroyers, drones, and attack aircraft to make “without blinking” access to the strait, allowing U.S. forces to identify and neutralize Iranian speedboats, drones, and anti-shipping threats before they can attack commercial vessels.
Fox also warned against allowing Iran to pursue its missile and nuclear programs as well as maintain dominance over Hormuz.
“if not now When?” He said. “If they had a nuclear weapon, they would use it.”
Experts warn Iran’s nuclear dual talks designed to waste time and reduce US pressure
But not everyone agrees that renewed military action would yield better results. (Contributor/Getty Images)
Fox, who also signed on to a recent policy paper from the Jewish Institute for America’s National Security, reiterated the report’s argument that Iran is using negotiations to buy time while preserving its military capabilities.
The paper was written by several retired senior US military officials and national security experts, including retired General Chuck Wald, former deputy commander of US European Command, and retired Vice Admiral Robert Harvard, former deputy commander of CENTCOM, arguing that the current ceasefire and diplomatic tracks “cannot credibly compel Iran” to meet US demands and warned that Tehran would “try to derail the negotiations, erode US resolve, and use the time to strengthen itself.” Is doing.”
The report calls for expanded military operations targeting Iran’s maritime capabilities, missile infrastructure and internal offensive mechanisms, while avoiding broader attacks on civilian infrastructure that could trigger broader regional tensions.
But not everyone agrees that renewed military action would yield better results.
Retired Lt. Col. Daniel Davis, a senior fellow at Defense Priorities and a longtime critic of expanded U.S. military interventions, warned that calls to “finish the job” ignore the realities exposed during recent fighting.
“As they say, ‘finishing the job’ is irrational,” Davis told Fox News Digital. “It’s illogical, and it violates any kind of military doctrine.”
Keith Kellogg urges us to ‘finish the job’ against Iran by seizing islands, strangulating the economy
Screenshots of a video released by US Central Command show smoke and dust rising after an explosion at an undisclosed location during Operation Epic Fury, an attack on Iran by the United States and Israel, which was released on February 28, 2026. (Centcom/Reuters)
Davis argued that despite thousands of attacks and weeks of fighting, Iran retained significant missile and maritime capabilities.
“Even after attacking 14,000 targets, we could not defeat them,” he said. “Why would anyone think going back a second time would have a different outcome?”
He described Iran’s geography, scattered missile infrastructure and asymmetric naval strategy as creating a “militarily insoluble problem”.
“The only thing that’s left is the diplomatic outcome,” Davis said.
The disagreement reflects broader divisions emerging in Washington as officials consider what to do next if the talks fail.
Click here to download Fox News App
Supporters of renewed military action argue that Iran is weaker than it has been in decades and that stopping it now risks allowing Tehran to regroup, rebuild its missile arsenal and maintain dominance over one of the world’s most important energy choke points.
Critics say the broader U.S. and Israeli attacks also failed to fundamentally break the regime’s control or dismantle its military capabilities, raising the risk that further action could draw the United States into another regional conflict with uncertain outcomes.
